We are curious about this cartoon. During your recent discussion with our class, you mentioned a reluctancy towards using images of 9/11. Why did you decide to use 9/11 as a metaphor for the subprime mortgage crisis?

As you know, when we talked, I explained that for credibility’s sake, I prefer to refrain from allowing a metaphor to grossly exceed my point. Of course, one of the tools employed by cartoonists is hyperbole and exaggeration, which can also be seen visually in the art of caricature. Sometimes, my colleagues and I exaggerate quite a lot.

Still, there is a case to be made for going too far. From a free-speech point of view – in the context of political dialogue – I believe people should have the widest latitude to say what they think or feel. The limitations I impose on myself are both moral and utilitarian: if I say only what I think, without considering the sensibilities of my audience, I lose persuasive power, and constructive conversation screeches to a halt. In the interest of maintaining a credible voice, a scorched-earth, no-holds-barred free speech policy would reveal its worthlessness as soon as most people stopped listening (or reading).

Not that that stops people from doing it. A too-common example of this is the habit of drawing parallels between somebody who is exhibiting a disagreeable position or behavior with Hitler or the Nazi regime. The metaphor may make sense to the person using it, but for those hearing it, it’s usually clear that the metaphor has so completely exceeded the point that the person using the metaphor loses persuasive authority.

One of our readers strongly believed that I was guilty of this in the cartoon above, and said so on our letters page. He wrote:

Once again, John de Rosier has managed to find a way to completely undermine his message, his credibility and my faith in the editorial decisions of this paper.

I am referring to de Rosier’s cartoon, “Ground Zero II,” on Jan. 18, in which he compared the subprime mortgage crisis and related credit crunch to the murder of 2,800 people on Sept. 11, 2001.

For those of us who have a deep emotional association with the images of the smoldering ruins of the World Trade Center, this analogy cheapens a national and personal tragedy.

To equate that terrible day to an impending economic slump mocks the deaths of innocent people at the hands of fanatical terrorists. It also shows a lack of judgment, common sense and simple decency toward the memory of thousands of people who perished in this state just a few years ago.

This is not the first appalling failure to exercise proper judgment by this cartoonist, and it speaks poorly of this paper that it pays him to occupy prime space on the editorial page.

KEITH B. KAPLAN

Saratoga Springs

I respect Mr. Kaplan’s view. Before I drew the above cartoon, I weighed the arguments he later raised in his letter, and explored these thoughts in frank conversations with others before drawing the cartoon. I believed then, as I do now, that my aims justify using the image.

Some days after the smoke of 9-11 had cleared, Mr. Bush went to ground zero in NYC and made a speech, marked by his use of a fireman’s bullhorn. In that speech, he promised the American people that those responsible for the devastation visited on our country would be brought to justice.

The question I raise in my cartoon is this: Where is Mr. Bush now? The sub-prime mortgage crisis is more than a mere economic downturn, it is a large-scale economic crime. Where is Mr. Bush now, at the ground zero of an historic financial crime? Why don’t we hear him saying that those responsible must be brought to justice?

Large, well-established and “respected” companies sold a mortgage product designed to siphon money from those least able to pay and transfer that wealth to those least in need. As a consequence, countless families have lost or will lose their homes. The economic fallout of this has and will continue to affect the entire country, perhaps for some time to come. It has no doubt contributed to what appears to be a looming recession. It is not a small story. It is a huge one.

Lives have been turned upside down, suffering inflicted, and a few have profited from the suffering of the many. And they are not being brought to justice, and not surprisingly, there seems to be no push from the Bush Administration to make that happen.

And that’s a failure of leadership that brings to mind a moment in Bush’s tenure when he did step up to the plate, and do the right thing – the moment my cartoon alludes to.

Is the sub-prime crisis on the same scale with 9-11? Clearly not. No lives were lost (that I know of), no fireballs. But the devastation remains nonetheless. It is widespread and real, with global implications. Its perpetrators remain at large, and we have a president with the power to go after them if he wanted to, but has chosen not to.

I’m another student of the New Visions class. Once again, thank you for taking the time to respond to our question; I don’t think any of us were expecting such an elaborate and thoughtful answer.

The points you make are valid. Personally, I was not offended to see the image of 9/11 used, as it only served to enhance your message (which is a very important one at that). I am glad, however, to now hear your side of the controversy and to understand why you used the image you did.

Once again, thanks, and keep up the great work. It’s always interesting to see what new cartoon you’ve cooked up for the paper.

I am also a NV student, and I want to thank you for your response as well.

I think your cartoon concentrated on an extremely important issue – one that I don’t think the public (myself included) fully understands – and an issue that needs to be addressed further. The sub-prime crisis is affecting a lot of people and something needs to be done.

I think your portrayal of the issue is an intelligent and clever parallel and makes me wonder as well where our president is.

I felt that the metaphor of 9/11 did not exceed your point; therefore you successfully accomplished your goal of portraying the issue in the form of an editorial cartoon.

This cartoon reminded me of your cartoon, “Who the hell is Jonbenet Ramsey?” because sometimes people need a reminder of where a nationâ€™s focus should be and it definitely puts things into perspective.

Thank you again for your response.

Your cartoon is the 3rd thing I look at everyday (for me, itâ€™s Dilbert first then my horoscope then your space), haha, so keep up the good work!

Yet again, this is a New Visions student here to comment on your cartoon.

Unfortunately, I was not in present the day when my class discussed this cartoon and posted the comment.

But after looking at the cartoon, I wholeheartedly agree with your decision to use a 9/11 metaphor to illustrate your idea of this economic epidemic. I feel your symbolism adds to the cartoon and was done well, not disgracefully.

Anybody harshly criticizing this cartoon is focusing solely on the “9/11″ image, not the entire concept behind the cartoon and in my opinion, being narrow-minded about it. It’s not like you drew the planes crashing into the twin towers, or had people jumping out of the buildings in your illustration, but sadly that’s what people associate it with, which you obviously already know.

Thanks for responding to the New Visions comment and for making thought-provoking and controversal cartoons. Keep up the good work.

I would just like to say thank you for talking to our class!
Your ideas are creative and are demonstrated well through cartoons. I look forward to more funny cartoons, and even controversial ones.
Excellent job!
-Samantha Brierley

John,
I’d like to thank you for taking the time out of your schedule to meet with our class. I’d also like to thank you for taking the time out to respond to our comment. We just wanted to clarify what you said during the meeting and your response cleared everything up. Once again thank you.